A rather disappointing day for Irish aviation, with news that Bmi has decided not to take up the SNN-LHR route and this not long after the govt said that it was looking to ensure SNN had a link to LHR - AND a link to a major European hub; assuming it maintains its "hands off" stance, it's hard to see how that'll happen. I guess no one in the Dept of Transport heard the old saying, "when you're in a hole, stop digging".

I think there's a lot left to run on this yet and you can be sure the Shannon lobby will continue to push this; more anon, I'm sure.

Our 42nd thread saw the start of construction on DUB's Terminal 2 and I think we're going to see a huge amount of change and disruption over the next few years, at the end of which - one hopes - DUB will be a slightly more pleasant place to fly through. Mind you there's already a huge amount of apron work going on, with a parallel taxiway to the old 23/05 now in operation. If anyone has a diagram/plan of DUB with all the various stages and elements of this plan, or even a link to it, that would be very helpful.

Just booked my mid-term break holiday! Off to CPH on 28th October for three nights! It'll be the inaugural flight to CPH (since they stopped after 9/11). Also, I hear that Pier D is due to open on the 28th so fingers crossed my flight will be departing from the new pier!!

Should I expect anything with it being a new route launch?? Champagne at the gate maybe?? Haha! Dream on!

Quoting EI787 (Reply 1):Should I expect anything with it being a new route launch?? Champagne at the gate maybe?? Haha! Dream on!

Eh I wouldnt hold my breath if I was you!!

Massive blow for SNN with BD ruing themselves out. If we assume that BA were telling the truth when they said they weren't interested then that still leaves another airline that the SAA were meant to be in talks with. Who?? Perhaps I'm being pessimistic but I just cant see another airline flying to LHR. I have said it before that the timing of all of this is really working against SNN with the sudden upturn in demand for slots at LHR due to open skies.

Does Shannon have enough premium traffic to warrant an airline using (wasting) valuable LHR slots?

From what I can see, the answer is no. If this route was a cash cow for EI, they would never have left. I understand everyone is up in arms in the west, but at this point in time the circumstances don't warrant it. If people need to get to London, they can fly FR to Dublin and then transfer to BA, EI, BD to LHR.

EI are right to have abandoned the route to something more profitable. It's not as though they are raking in the cash - they need to do what works.

To change the topic -

The other day I flew DUB-LGW-DUB (on my way to and from VAR) on BA in Club Europe - and Club Europe was completely full both ways. I wonder if EI leaving oneworld has pushed a lot of pax over to BA. It wouldn't surprise me. Both flights were evening flights and on both there was a full dinner and full bar (including champagne) on both sectors.

Now onto another thing. The Anna Livia lounge in Dublin seems to be run and operated by the DAA. Is this true? It's an absolute whore of a lounge. The place was packed with AF pax, BA pax, IB pax, and so on. The floors were dirty, there were crisps all over the floors and down the seats - it's way to small for what it's being used for, and is really a load of crap. The lounge needs to be expanded desperately. Also, having to use a code to use the toilets is a bit rich as well - they're outside the lounge thanks to the "well thought out" layout.

I had to do a feedback survey online after my BA flight, and I slammed the lounge in no uncertain terms. The EI lounge is head and shoulders better (even if it has PAY internet). EI should grasp some extra revenue and allow other airlines pax into their lounge. BA pax on EIDUB-LHR can use it, but no-one else. A total waste of a decent lounge.

Quoting EI787 (Reply 1):Should I expect anything with it being a new route launch?? Champagne at the gate maybe??

Yup you will get red carpet on top of this, and balloons and confetti and the likes. And then to top it all off when you arrive they will play a little anthem over the PA system saying you have landed and how early you are and stuff, a la FR!!!! LOL

Yeah i was gobsmacked about BMI. I was sure they would take it over. I suppose we will start hearing bout this all over again next week on the radio!!! Hopefully KLM or Lufthansa will not succumb to FR's power and try and give SNN some sort of service.

I have to say Im pretty surprised that BD have decided not to go with SNN. But how long would they have stuck at it for? I'd say summer 2009 when they woud use the slots for US depsrtures, or eastbound long haul services, amybe a bit longer.

I am a bit disappointed to hear it though, as I was planning, at the back of my mind, to fly LBA-LHR-SNN to visit some friends in Limerick. I guess I'll just use the FR direct service.

Quoting ClassicLover (Reply 3):Now onto another thing. The Anna Livia lounge in Dublin seems to be run and operated by the DAA. Is this true? It's an absolute whore of a lounge. The place was packed with AF pax, BA pax, IB pax, and so on. The floors were dirty, there were crisps all over the floors and down the seats - it's way to small for what it's being used for, and is really a load of crap. The lounge needs to be expanded desperately. Also, having to use a code to use the toilets is a bit rich as well - they're outside the lounge thanks to the "well thought out" layout.

Oh sweet Lord. I've never used that lounge, but it sounds like a nightmare and an embarrassment. The toilets situation is a joke.

Quoting F1eddie (Reply 4):Yeah i was gobsmacked about BMI. I was sure they would take it over. I suppose we will start hearing bout this all over again next week on the radio!!!

Most probably. I know I went off on a quite a few rants myself over the situation, but at this stage of the game it's just time to move on from EI shorthaul at SNN and focus on KLM/WX and the likes and retaining all the services that SNN has. I think the whole situation has highlighted how critical each and every service to SNN is. IMO, I think they should look at significantly expanding the cargo services at the airport. Maybe enter into talks with DHL, TNT, etc and look at developing some sort of freight-forwarding centre. I know Leipzig is to become (already is) a major FF centre and has the advantage of road connections to the rest of continental Europe, but SNN has the runway to accommodate large freighters and this could be an area to look into to reduce the dependency on PAX.

Was just looking on the DAA route maps and they still have not put SFO on it. Its really annoying me now. Yet TPA has been put on the route map. I wondered how this was possible and it turns out its with delta via ATL. According to the DAA website also its the same code for ATL>MCO as it is ATL>TPA. Is this possible. I would assume its not!! Must be a typo on the DAA side or something.

Cityjet says that while it is possible, even likely, that they will operate a SNN service, the timing is bad for them as their resources are committed and they're in the middle of changing over their fleet. It says it is difficult to see them being ready to launch a service by the time EI pulls out.

Also, it says that things would be made easier if the local lobby group were open to other routes, apart from LHR.

It also emerged that the ACL said it would continue to target EI for a return to SNN, even if bmi agreed to operate to LHR. What a bunch of idiots!

Bitterly disappointed about BMI, but it would seem the decision was swung quite recently from what I have been hearing. The use of slots at LHR (the former BMED slots revert back to BA very soon) and the whole Ryanair thing are cited as chief reasons.

I must say i'm still very surprised. Its not often you get a guaranteed market handed to you on a plate.

Having said that its time these atlantic connectivity buffoons realise that LHR is not the "be all and end all" of hubbing in Europe, and it hasnt been for a very long time!

Bring on CDG, AMS or FRA!

Lufthansa might be a safer bet with a FRA route (FR have pulled SNN-HHN) after the murmerings we heard from O'leary about frequency increases on SNN-BVA and a possible SNN-AMS.

I fail to see why the BMI decision was a surprise, although BM have made some strange decisions in the past, SNN is still a minor backwater, with a weak population profile, even if there are some strong local users. No onward feed to other BM services either. Not a spot to waste a slot.

All the lounges at DUB are pretty weak, the BMI lounge is, by a large measure, the best. The only one to vaguely match the better standards elsewhere, but still a long way from Asia.

The EI lounge offers less and less service over the years.
The golden years of reading the New York Times there are long past ( A concession that cost EI near nothing, since there was capacity to uplift them on the overnight flights). I never tried the massage either. The location in Pier B is mighty handy for Pier A passengers also.

The Anna Livia lounge - well little to be said.

Anyone know the reason for the multiple formation flights over Dublin on Thursday by the Air Corps while the board was down?

Quite simply, no. Airport charges at AMS are high, and with the new policy of showing all inclusive fares, this will increase the headline cost. It may be a case though of increasing the higher fare brackets, but retaining low "headline" fares. What is certain though is that the average fare would simply have to rise to compensate for the costs of using Schiphol.

Personally, I cant see it happening. MOL is just trying to keep Cityjet / AF / KLM out of SNN.

Shannon will rue the day it sold it soul to FR: it has lost British Airways, Easyjet, Flybe, Hapag Lloyd express, its Heathrow link and BD has been scared away.

FR may well pack in the pax, but with no-one left to compete with, SNN may well still end up hurting in the pocket.

Yes I know of the MAD base, but MAD had a lot of empty terminal capacity to fill after it opened T4, and offered discounts to fill it. AMS just doesnt have that kind of capacity to spare, so wont be discounting its charges. The lo-co pier only has 7 gates that are pretty well utilised. AMS will accomodate airlines operational wishes, but it doesnt feel it needs to offer discounts and it has stated this.

Im not for a second saying that FR will start charging 500 euro for a one way to AMS from SNN, but it simply will not be able to charge 0.01 euro and make a profit. Passenger service charge at AMS is about 25 euro, a lot higher than MAD.

The point is that the average fare will have to be higher to make a profit, than for example, SNN-BVA. FR has enough problems with Yields at SNN without running another loss maker designed purely to keep a potential competitor out.

Incidentally, do you know how well the MAD base is doing Pe@rson? I havent heard much about it, although I guess no news is good news![Edited 2007-10-06 01:45:01]

I understand your point, and I obviously agree with your theoretical stance regarding higher usage so less incentive to discount. That, per se, is fine, and is simple supply and demand.

There are, however, exceptions.

MAN was also heavily utilised when FR first expressed an interest to serve it, but FR managed to get an excellent discount – as former MAN and then FR Jeans has clearly stated – based on delivering considerable volume. FR also demanded slots that weren’t really possible. Jeans has stated that MAN didn’t need FR, but it wanted the extra volume. Of course, the discount wasn’t as good as with unused airports – obviously they have even more incentive to discount – but it was clearly sufficiently attractive to entice FR.

Likewise LGW. A very busy airport that is delay-prone and with very few slots during the best periods. Some say that FR often spends an hour on the ground at LGW due to delays. But FR supposedly got a sufficiently attractive deal – again, obviously not as good as with unused airports – that it decided to fly there.

Of course, by serving airports like MAN and LGWFR slightly modified its strategy, with one objective: to increase its presence on flights from Ireland to the UK thereby becoming the number-one airline between Ireland and the UK.

FR frequently offers 1c/1p flights to/from LGW and MAN, although such fares obviously aren’t designed to make a profit but rather to fill seats (ancillary revenue always fundamental).

Hence, it is quite possible than FR could fly SNN-AMS in order to strengthen its position at SNN and thereby ensuring no other airline flies the route. I, however, don’t think SNN-AMS will happen, but it could.

"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."

When we got to STN, I was annoyed about finding out about the new boarding system. You probably know about it already but here is something for those of you who don't know. In the past, priority was given to passengers with disabilities and young children, then those who checked in early and had got numbers 1 - 99, finally those with 100 - 189. Now, the system goes that priority goes to people who checked in online, then to those who BOUGHT a priority boarding at the gate for £2 (now thats very FR!) then to everyone else. The thing that got to me though, was that there was a family with 2 very young children (about 1 and 3, I think) behind us (we were nearly the back of the queue anyway) and because they hadn't got a prioirty boarding pass, they had to board even behind us. The flight was 100% full and there was 26 in our group who had taken up the last 2 or 3 empty rows (A, B, C or D, E, F), then were filling up most of everything else (Middle seats and that), so when this family boarded behind us, they had seats which were 20 rows apart. I know I would have been inconvineienced by having to let them board before us, but having to sit a 3 year old child between two starngers is just a bit far. The crew which we had (Italian and rubbish) didn't do anything to help them, or anyone else.

I am happy to report the return journey was much better, even though we were all over different parts of the plane again. The crew was much better, more attentive, and the purser was really really fit.

I wish that FR had a more even level of service you can expect, as after experiencing some of the flights I have, may put people off, but thats just the way of FR.

Alex

P.S. I wonder if as a group, we have flown on the entire fleet of an airline?

For FR, mine are CSB, CSC, CSN, DCE and DHG. I have flown COX, but thats either in South America or is Cans.

Yes, thats all understood. Of course you will notice that average fares on LGW and MAN are higher than on much of the network. Of course, that is also supply and demand at work, but it's also a factor of the costs of operation. SNN-AMS would need to have fare levels that were similar to these two to turn sufficient profit.

Yes, you do see 0.01 fares on LGW and MAN, but you also see a hell of a lot of 199 euro fares too! I also understand your point about the ancilliary revenue streams, and the need to "get bums on seats" to earn such revenue. I am very familiar with Ryanair's model having worked with a similar model in a previous life....

Perhaps my initial post implied that FR would need to charge "legacy fares" to make SNN-AMS work, which of course was not what I meant. Perhaps I chose my words badly with that post.

Quoting Dstc47 (Reply 11):I fail to see why the BMI decision was a surprise, although BM have made some strange decisions in the past, SNN is still a minor backwater, with a weak population profile, even if there are some strong local users. No onward feed to other BM services either. Not a spot to waste a slot.

I would have thought it a surprise considering the airline leaving was doing a good job of filling a 174 seater 4 times a day. Considering BMI waste many of their slots using ERJ's, this would surely have been a massive improvement? Why bother going up against BA, KL and AF to AMS, CDG, BRU etc when you can have a proven market all to yourself?

Despite claiming its a "backwater", it evidently is capable of filling the seats to LHR on a daily basis.

Quoting Shamrock604 (Reply 12):Shannon will rue the day it sold it soul to FR: it has lost British Airways, Easyjet, Flybe, Hapag Lloyd express, its Heathrow link and BD has been scared away.

Indeed. At the time FR launched the SNN base I thought the CAA had made a major faux pas. Shortly afterwords I saw the writing on the wall when FR bullied U2 out of Ireland. U2 were advertising heavily and FR just undercut every fare U2 offered. At a high(er) cost/yield airport like LGWU2 have better options than slugging out a turf war with FR.

Quoting Shamrock604 (Reply 14):Im not for a second saying that FR will start charging 500 euro for a one way to AMS from SNN, but it simply will not be able to charge 0.01 euro and make a profit. Passenger service charge at AMS is about 25 euro, a lot higher than MAD.

They dont make any profit from the 0.01 fares anyway. Its the ancillary revenue and the last minute books ht make FR its money (along with clever tax avoidance and aircraft deals)

Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 15):MAN was also heavily utilised when FR first expressed an interest to serve it, but FR managed to get an excellent discount – as former MAN and then FR Jeans has clearly stated – based on delivering considerable volume. FR also demanded slots that weren’t really possible. Jeans has stated that MAN didn’t need FR, but it wanted the extra volume. Of course, the discount wasn’t as good as with unused airports – obviously they have even more incentive to discount – but it was clearly sufficiently attractive to entice FR.

Likewise LGW. A very busy airport that is delay-prone and with very few slots during the best periods. Some say that FR often spends an hour on the ground at LGW due to delays. But FR supposedly got a sufficiently attractive deal – again, obviously not as good as with unused airports – that it decided to fly there.

OK, if you were sitting in an office at AMS and MOL rang you and said "I want 75% off for one or two daily flights to AMS from SNN, I guarentee 20,000 passengers per year" I think you would be thinking "Ive seen what you did to U2 in Ireland, If you want to come in badly enough you can pay 100% or go to EIN, Im not pissing off KL and Transavia and diluting the connecting traffic they pull from te SNN region via ORK and DUB so you can keep compeditors out of a poorly performing base, furthermore the volume you are proposing is a 0.00004% or so of my yearly traffic and it's not with the hastle Mick, Bye"

"OK, if you were sitting in an office at AMS and MOL rang you and said "I want 75% off for one or two daily flights to AMS from SNN, I guarentee 20,000 passengers per year" I think you would be thinking "Ive seen what you did to U2 in Ireland, If you want to come in badly enough you can pay 100% or go to EIN, Im not pissing off KL and Transavia and diluting the connecting traffic they pull from te SNN region via ORK and DUB so you can keep compeditors out of a poorly performing base, furthermore the volume you are proposing is a 0.00004% or so of my yearly traffic and it's not with the hastle Mick, Bye"

LMAO! 20,000 pax with "one or two daily flights" ? LOL!

189 seats x 364 days x 2 = 137,592, and 80% LF = 110,073. So probably about 110,000 pax through AMS if FR operated daily SNN-AMS-SNN. How in Gods name you get 20,000 is beyond me. Can't neither spell nor do maths. No wonder you suggested an airline fly LBA-MAN and LON-NWI.

If FR wanted to add more routes to/from AMS it'd quite easily offer 1m pax through AMS/year. And therein lies the point: if FR were to start SNN-AMS-SNN, it'd be bound to begin more routes to/from AMS at some point in order to gain better deals through higher guaranteed volume. But I said, and still believe, it won't happen.

[Edited 2007-10-06 03:33:19]

"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."

Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 20):They dont make any profit from the 0.01 fares anyway. Its the ancillary revenue and the last minute books ht make FR its money (along with clever tax avoidance and aircraft deals)

Brian,

Understood. But FR will need to extract higher revenue from AMS than it has been able to thus far from SNN. Hence the "average" fare will need to be higher.

FR suits SNN. ORK can do better. Thats why I simply dont understand why some particular posters on PPrune (TTT springs to mind) get so bitter over the whole FR/SNN deal. You are better off with EI at ORK, and an FR presence of sorts to keep them honest.

The outlying airports and FR service are fine for a huge number of people, but not for everyone.

Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 21):189 seats x 364 days x 2 = 137,592, and 80% LF = 110,073. So probably about 110,000 pax through AMS if FR operated daily SNN-AMS-SNN. How in Gods name you get 20,000 is beyond me. Can't neither spell nor do maths. No wonder you suggested an airline fly LBA-MAN and LON-NWI.

I just pulled 20,000 out of my head, I did not do any calculation on it, either way its still a tiny percentage of annual traffic at AMS, if you could not be bothered to work out the percentage for that one? Its 0.0002% (or so) of yearly traffic. And at an 80% load factor.....that is seriously ambitious. EI manages about 50% O&D on a 94% full aircraft, from my experience, what hope would FR have from SNN with no KL agreement and a smaller population base?

From AMS point o view its not worth pissing off KLM for. What would AMS gian? AMS needs KL (and AF) on side a lot more than AMS needs FR.

What you choose to neglect is than MAN was not always as busy as it is now, and BA has all but pulled out of MAN. MAN-DUB is a heavy route, and FR were not going to leave it all to EI (or BA, if they were still around, I dont know).

For the last time, it was you suggented the domestic flights thing. My view, as you well know, and I have clearly stated, is that domestic lights are not going to be around forever, which would very much be the case if teh government got their act together and got moving on the high-speed link along the east coast of the UK and linked it to the London airports and the 'chunnel'.

FYI: I cant either spell nor do maths" You have just siad I can do both. Funny. So once again I suggest tht you base any debate on fact and not stoop to lowly personal insults to get your point accross. As I wrote yoeterday when you do so it is you look like the idiot and not I.

Quoting Shamrock604 (Reply 22):Understood. But FR will need to extract higher revenue from AMS than it has been able to thus far from SNN.

I suppose they might be able to do so, but only 25% of SNN-LHR was connecting anyway, so 75% had LON as a final destination. With these figures and the lack of interline with KL I dont really see a stampeed of high yield on SNN-AMS (or CDG, or anywhere else). I could be totally wrong though.

As for ORK can do better...I dont agree at all. One airline dominance at an airport is not at all a agood thing. In years gone by the tyrant was green, but at least he would talk to other carriers, a bit of co-operation, passegers had real options...now the tyrant is Blue, and passengers have no choices, wither fly direct with FR or connect and take your chances and the hastle. I think SNN could have done better if they had struck delas with several airlines for several routes. But this was a government lead idea anyway, no wonder it has worked out so well!

Yeah, so when FR got its deal at MANBA weren't there. MAN was a busy airport then - as Jeans has clearly stated - but it still got a favourable deal, even though MAN didn't need FR - as Jeans has clearly stated. Why haven't you mentioned LGW? Always a very busy airport, yet FR got a sufficiently attractive deal - of course, not to unused airport level, but everything's relative - to entice it there. As I have said, FR modified its strategy for flights to/from LGW, MAN, etc, because of its desire to become the number-one carrier from Ireland to the UK, which, for a good while, was the backbone of its overall operation.

Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 23):FYI: I cant either spell nor do maths" You have just siad I can do both.

I actually put NEITHER. Clearly you can't spell correctly, do maths, or read.

[Edited 2007-10-06 03:57:50]

"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."

25 Shamrock604
: No, of course one airline dominance is not a good thing, but I dont think you suffer from that at ORK. You certainly would if FR ruled the roost! The

26 BrianDromey
: I was not aware of any significant discounts at LGW. I dont know. But what I do know is this: U2 launches LGW - ORK/NOC/SNN, FR keep blabbing on abou

27 Shamrock604
: U2 pulled out of all three airports at the same time. They reduced frequency at SNN first, but didnt pull it until ORK and NOC got pulled as well. Al

28 EXTspotter
: Everyone knows that FR is a bully in the LCC world and MOL enjoys throwing his wieght around. Only an idiot would try and beat FR at their own game. T

29 BrianDromey
: Thanks for clarification, I was under the impression that it started out as 2x daily ORK, and once daily SNN and NOC. The only reason I thought that

30 Shamrock604
: Eaxctly Brian, and thats what its all about: options! Now all they have in SNN to London is FR! Ghastly!

31 Pe@rson
: Again, I put: As I clearly stated, it wouldn't be anywhere near what it'd get a unused airports (or underused airports, for that matter), or whatever

32 Pe@rson
: For ORK-LGW-ORK incl. all taxes: For Tues 16th Oct out, Wed 17th back: I can get it for 67.77 EUR For Sat 17th Nov out, Sun 18th back: I can get it f

33 BrianDromey
: I agree, I had a look a little earlier, and I remember historic fares being somewhat higher. (when U2 were still around in 2005 they were 25EUR rtn!)

34 Pe@rson
: No airline ever pays the rack rate. Just like no airline ever pays the catalog price for aircraft. And FR are some of the best airline negotiators. W